Xref: utzoo soc.women:8840 alt.flame:1364
Path: utzoo!hoptoad!amdahl!ames!rutgers!uwvax!oddjob!pooh
From: pooh@oddjob.UChicago.EDU (soggy and hard to light)
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Flamage re Mark Ethan Smith/Netiquette
Message-ID: <14241@oddjob.UChicago.EDU>
Date: 17 Jan 88 14:39:46 GMT
References: <229*manis@instr.camosun.bcc.cdn> <6466@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <8801071134.AA05730@garnet.berkeley.edu> <3031@killer.UUCP> <22556@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <31O8@killer.UUCP> <1841@epimass.EPI.COM> <2939@killer.UUCP>
Reply-To: pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu.UUCP (soggy and hard to light)
Organization: The Wild, Chunky, Spunky Planet of Mary Lou Retton Clones
Lines: 16

In article <2939@killer.UUCP> era@killer.UUCP (Mark Ethan Smith) writes:
>So far the "no" votes greatly outnumber
>the "yes" votes, but not by 90%, indicating that there might be a
>number of male posters who do not oppose equal rights, but haven't
>voted.

There is a logic flaw here.  The people who voted AGAINST the
groups might simply object to their creation as a separate
group, or object to its moderation (as was specifically addressed
by two followups that I've seen).  It does NOT necessarily imply
that they are against equal rights.

Pooh
      pooh@oddjob.uchicago.edu

Look for significance where there is none, and you will surely find it.